This is a Seanad Bill which has been amended by the Dáil. In accordance with Standing Order 103 it is deemed to have passed its First, Second and Third Stages in the Seanad and is placed on the Order Paper for Report Stage. On the question "That the Bill be received for final consideration", the Minister may explain the purpose of the amendments made by the Dáil. This is looked upon as the report of the Dáil amendments to the Seanad. The only matters, therefore, which may be discussed are the amendments made by the Dáil. For Senators' convenience I have arranged for the printing and circulation of the amendments. Senators may speak only once on Report Stage.
National Disability Authority Bill, 1998 [ Seanad Bill amended by the Dáil ] : Report and Final Stages.
Question proposed: "That the Bill be received for final consideration."
Forty-four Government amendments were made in the Dáil to the National Disability Authority Bill, 1998. Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 make substantive changes to section 20(3) of the Bill, by expanding the criteria to be taken into account in selecting the members of the authority. The remaining amendments are technical in nature. Amendments Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, 11 to 29, inclusive, and 31 to 44, inclusive, provide for replacement of the term "Chief Executive" with that of "Director" and amendments Nos. 8 and 30 clarify the use of the term "Director"vis-à-vis the staff of the authority, for the purposes of sections 19 and 27.
Amendments Nos. 1 to 7, inclusive, 11 to 29, inclusive, and 31 to 44, inclusive, are technical in nature, substituting the term "Director" for that of "Chief Executive", in each case where it occurs in the Bill. The term "Chief Executive" appeared in sections 2, 17, 19, 25 to 31, inclusive, 33 and 36. This amendment was made for purposes of consistency with the organisational structure that is envisaged for the National Disability Authority.
The interim National Disability Authority, which was appointed last year, is in the process of considering the internal organisational arrangement that it will put in place once established on a statutory footing. In the course of that consideration, and in light of recommendations of consultants assisting the process, the authority has decided to use the job title of "Director" for the most senior officer in the NDA. I was happy to support this preference and to amend the Bill accordingly.
Amendments Nos. 8 and 30 are technical amendments and arose from a drafting point raised in this House about the consistency of the use of terminology in regard to the numbering of the chief executive, now director, among the staff of the authority in various sections of the Bill. In some instances in the Bill, express provision is made for the inclusion of the director within the meaning of the term "staff". In other instances this is not the case. The effect of amendment No. 8 was to ensure that the director would not be included within the term "staff" in section 19(2). Amendment No. 30 ensures that all officers and servants of the National Rehabilitation Board, who transfer from the board to the authority, will retain certain minimum terms and conditions relating to their employment.
Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 are substantive amendments to section 20(3) of the Bill. They were proposed in response to issues raised by a number of Deputies on Committee Stage concerning the criteria for selection and appointment of the members of the authority. The wording used in paragraphs (a) and (b)(i) of section 20(3) has been amended to strengthen the onus placed on the Minister to take account of certain criteria in appointing the members of the authority. The original drafting of the paragraphs concerned referred to the "desirability" of having a certain number of people with disabilities and of either sex on the authority. The new wording sets an "objective" of securing at least the representation specified of the groups concerned. The new wording places a strong onus on the Minister to meet the criteria provided while preserving a necessary measure of flexibility to allow for the exceptional case where it may not be possible to adhere strictly to the criteria.
Amendment No. 10 makes two further amendments to paragraph (b), subsection (3). The first of these relates to the issue of gender balance which was raised on Committee Stage in this House and which led to the inclusion of paragraph (b) and its provision that, where possible, at least eight of the members of the authority shall be women and at least eight shall be men, thus fulfilling a gender balance of 40 per cent among the 20 members of the authority subject to ministerial selection. However, as the fully constituted board of the NDA will comprise 21 members, one seat on the authority being reserved for an elected representative of the staff, the provision has been amended to provide for the inclusion, where possible, of at least nine members who are women and at least nine who are men. This will ensure a gender balance of 40 per cent having regard to the full number of board members.
Amendment No. 10 also amends paragraph (b) of section 20(3) by including, in a new sub-paragraph (b)(ii), an additional criterion requiring the Minister to have regard to the desirability that there be an urban-rural balance in the membership of the authority. This amendment was made in response to a proposal by Deputies on Committee Stage to amend subsection (3) to provide for a geographical balance in the membership of the authority. I believe the new provision captures the principle of the Deputies' concerns and that it is a useful addition to the provisions of the Bill.
I commend these amendments to the Seanad.
I may be out of order, but are the problems in the existing authority still sub judice or are they about to be sorted out?
Is the Senator referring to the Irish Council for People with Disabilities as distinct from the National Disability Authority?
Yes.
The Senator is not the only person who has made that distinction. The Irish Council for People with Disabilities has elected members and had an interim council from March 1997 to December 1998. A steering group has been in place since December 1998 to report by September 1999. It is an entirely different group from the National Disability Authority.
Thank you.
I understand all amendments are being discussed together. I wish to make two points. I disagree with amendment No. 2 because the situation is adequately catered for in the statement, "The body will assist the Minister in the co-ordination and development of policy relating to persons with disability". If we started to introduce each individual element of what policy might be put into the Bill and debate its merits, we would be here forever. We must understand and believe in the capacity of the new authority to develop these concerns.
In regard to amendment No. 4, it is the function of the authority to evaluate and advise the Minister on issues of policy relevant to people with disabilities. That is why it is being established. In an earlier debate it was stated in the other House –
For clarification purposes, the Senator referred to amendments Nos. 2 and 4—
Acting Chairman
Senator Cox must be referring to the Dáil amendments.
Sorry, I seem to have the wrong notes with me. I will not make any further comment except to say we raised on the Order of Business today the issue of access for people with disabilities to polling booths. It is not an issue for this Bill but I take this opportunity to remind the Minister of it when she is in the House.
Mr. Ryan
I am at a loss, either through my own fault or the fault of somebody else, because I do not have a copy of the amendments. The Minister said most of the amendments are technical. The one that fascinates me is the amendment to strengthen the onus placed on the Minister to take account of certain criteria in appointing the members of the authority. Of course these amendments are welcome. What we are debating is the obligation that should be on a Minister in terms of the composition of the National Disability Authority to ensure people with disabilities and of either sex are on the authority. We should have moved beyond that. We should not be discussing whether the word is "objective", "onus" or whatever. We should take it for granted that a body such as the National Disability Authority will have, by definition, a substantial number of people who have experienced what it is like to have disabilities. This country is full of people who talk about other people's problems. It is full of men talking about gender balance. Senator Manning talks about gender even if only to oppose it.
I do not.
Mr. Ryan
Whatever about gender balance, and we can discuss that, the idea that the Houses of the Oireachtas has spent a great deal of time talking about the language we would use to ensure people with disabilities would be substantially represented on the National Disability Authority suggests we have a long way to go. I accept and welcome the amendments but it is time we sat down and thought about a situation where we do not have to talk about these matters. If we set up a body to deal with disabilities it should be substantially representative of those who live with disabilities. If we set up a body to deal with education it should be substantially representative of those who have experience in this area. Otherwise we spend our lives talking about people and are almost at the stage of asking, "Does he take sugar?", the classic one about a person in a wheelchair. People with disabilities are capable and much better at articulating their views than those of us who talk about them can ever be.
The amendments are welcome but can we move on to a philosophical position where the Houses of the Oireachtas accept that if we set up bodies to deal with the problems of people with disabilities we accept that the best people to explain the problems are those who have disabilities?
Senator Ryan's point is important. The Senator is correct that we are always saying people with disabilities should be at the table, so to speak, particularly when decisions are being taken with regard to their future. Measures to empower people with disabilities have been taken. For example, the Minister for Health and Children has established a co-ordinating committee in each health board to ensure that people with physical or learning disabilities are included when decisions are taken with regard to spending additional funds in each health board area. People with disabilities are being empowered by their inclusion in the decision-making process. This also applies to the National Disability Authority.
The interim authority was appointed last July and 65 per cent of the members of that authority have a disability. In addition, 40 per cent of the members are women. The purpose of the legislation is to ensure that aspect will be protected in the appointment of future authorities. The authority is in place on an interim basis pending the passage of the legislation and 65 per cent of its members have disabilities. The Bill will protect that position in the future.
Question put and agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I thank Senators for their contributions to the Bill, which was initiated in the Seanad. As the Minister of State with responsibility for disability, I consider this is a greatly important Bill because it puts the National Disability Authority, which was established last July on an interim basis, on a statutory footing.
It is important to remember that the authority was the cornerstone of the recommendations contained in the report of the Commission on the Status of People with Disabilities, which was published in November 1996. If one reads the report, one will note that the establishment of an authority was considered the engine room which would drive the implementation of the other recommendations in the future. The report considered that it should be the research body involved in policy and that, most importantly, it should be involved in setting standards and codes of practice for services for people with disabilities. The passage of the legislation is a positive step by the Oireachtas and I thank Senators who contributed to the debate on the various Stages of the Bill.
I compliment the Minister of State on this important Bill. It is the Minister of State's first major piece of legislation and I compliment her on the way in which she steered it through both Houses. She is a Minister of State who listens and is not afraid to change her mind if the arguments are strong enough. I thank her for the way in which she handled the Bill in the House.
I also compliment the Minister of State on the Bill. It is important that an institution is being put in place to do the work outlined in the Bill. The Minister of State took the issue of disabilities on board long before the Government took office. Although it is election time the various organisations are relatively quiet. This is indicative of the fact that they realise the Government has made a commitment to people with disabilities. It is important to acknowledge that not everything has been done yet. Much remains to be done and I hope the Bill will move us further down the road.
The issue of access to buildings is particularly important. People who have disabilities should not be denied access to buildings because they cannot enter them without assistance. The resolution of this problem in the near future should be an objective. This is only one of many issues which need to be addressed, but the Bill is a step forward. If we continue to move forward at this rate, the Government will have a record of which it can be proud at the next election.
Acting Chairman
I hope that will not be too soon.
Mr. Ryan
I also compliment the Minister of State. This issue is close to her heart and she deserves to be complimented on getting the Bill through Government, which I understand is probably the major bottleneck for most Bills, and both Houses of the Oireachtas relatively quickly.
A fundamental issue is whether an amendment should be inserted in the Constitution to require the commercial sector to make provision for people with disabilities which cannot be struck down by the Supreme Court in the future. I do not wish to make this a contentious issue but we must integrate people with disabilities into every area of society. This will cost money.
Given the particularly vocal assertion at present that there is a labour shortage, perhaps employers could be nudged into broadening their horizons and looking in the direction of people with degrees of disability who could do many of the jobs that employers say currently they cannot find people to do. Conservatism and a lack of imagination means that people with disabilities are not being offered jobs which are now vacant.
Acting Chairman
I also congratulate the Minister of State.
Question put and agreed to.
Acting Chairman
When is it proposed to sit again?
At 10.30 a.m. tomorrow.